DISQUS

What a fabulous list of people to be included with! Thanks Roosterites!

The coolest thing (for me) is how well I've gotten to know almost everyone on this list. They are are REAL people, genuine and sharing people, and that shows in their Tweets. I'm proud to say I've met (by my count) 44 of the other 49 In Real Life. And without fail, every one was exactly what I expected.

Steve - I don't even know what to say. I am so, so sorry for your loss. My heart goes out to your and your family and all Steven II touched. If there is anything you need, or anything I can do, you know how to find me.

No SEO master here either Tim, but I've never heard anything regarding Google treating something in quotes differently.

Personally, I think folks have WAY too much concern over duplicate content. What Google doesn't want to see is entire sites (or the bulk of a site) duplicated. Most SEOs agree that Google isn't going to "penalize" someone for a page here and there. There is duplicate content ALL over the net.

Now try to "cheat" the search engines by manipulating them and they'll eventually slap you.

You may want to re-think that not linking off the blog thing. Even if readers don't click through (im my experience, some do, some don't - depends on how, why and how you link), the blogger you link to will know you did, they'll come visit, and may just link back to you at some point. While you should always keep the visitor's best interest in mind, outbound links ultimately produce inbound links, which produce better search placement, which brings more visitors.

"... quotes tells google that its not my original content..."

Really? So if I'm reading this right, you're saying that Google's spiders pick up the html blockquote tag and ignore what's in it? Or treat it some special way?

I don't doubt you, I've just never heard mention of this. Do you have a link to anything that discusses this? Google has definitely indexed the content of the quote here, so I'm curious to know more about this "quotes tell Google this is not my original content".

I find it very difficult to put an exact ROI on blogging / social media. I ask every client where they found us, and invariably the answer I get is "on the Internet".

Well, is that the primary blog, a neighborhood blog, my static site, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, MeetUp.com, Yelp, Upcoming, Zillow, Trulia, or any of a number of other places?

Occasionally someone will say, "Hey, heard you on the radio, read your quote in the paper/magazine and will you please come list our house". Those I attribute directly to the primary blog as I'm certain that is how the mainstream media finds me. But I can count those on two hands.

I can derive statistics from the blog.

Home search registrations from April 16, 2008 through yesterday (March 4, 2009) = 741
Blog contact forms completed in same time period - 542 (this is after removing sales pitches)

Total "electronic contacts" 4/16/2008 - 3/4/2009 = 1,283

Unique visitors to blog in that time period: 511,556

So my ratio of contacts to visits is not good (at least I don't think it's good) at almost 400 visitors per contact. But the cost of getting those visitors isn't high (other than in time, which IS a cost). The cost is the same (roughly) whether there are 100 visitors or 1,000,000.

So I get 1283 "contacts" in 11 months. How many sales does that translate to?

Again, this is difficult to answer. Oh, I can tell you the number of transaction sides in that time period (31) and I could calculate the GCI (don't have the numbers in front of me, my CPA is pouring over data trying to keep me from giving a third of it to Uncle Sam).

But so what? Those 31 may not (actually, did not) all come from those 1,283 contacts. Internet contacts are different. We just put a buyer under contract that first signed up for listings just over three years ago. Other times people will search and never register but do eventually become clients.

I've got another blog that is very specific to a neighborhood. It only gets 25 visits a week, but I'll get 3 or 4 calls a month from it. Typically 1 of those turns into a paying client at some point.

Then, how do you count the listing that came from a friend of a friend I met on Twitter? I'd say that listing is a result of being engaged on Twitter -- primarily meeting local Twits face-to-face, even though I've yet to meet this client face-to-face. Some would classify this client as a "referral" or a "sphere of influence" client, but the simple fact is, I never would have been put n touch with them if it weren't for a relationship that originated on Twitter.

The cost of time HAS to be included in any ROI calculation. I don't know how much time I spend reading, researching and writing blog posts, or Twittering, or going to meetups. But time IS money. Would that time be better spent cold calling, or doing direct mailings, or sitting in open houses? (none of which I do)

I don't know. Maybe. Maybe not. I despise cold calling and direct mailing and sitting opens. I *like* reading, and researching and writing blog posts and Tweets. Because I like this stuff, I am "good" at it. Or at least I think I am. And because I despise those other types of activities, I suck at them. It's not that they aren't viable prospecting methods. In the right hands, clearly they work. They just aren't for me. Just as blogging and Twittering and going to meetups isn't for everyone.

Does that make any sense?

Hypocrisy on Bloodhound? I'm stunned.

The almost constant barrage of advertising for their conference, while in the same breath slamming Inman Connect and other "vendorsluts" (they charge for their conference, hello? They ARE a vendor), the personal attacks while putting on some air of moral superiority, the self-proclamations being a supreme being, all this and more is all but a constant barrage of hypocrisy.

But, in Greg's defense, he just about HAS to be a member of the NAR. In our neck of the woods, one can not get access to the MLS unless they are members of their local and state associations, and the NAR. An agent without MLS access simply won't make it in this market.

So I understand why Greg is a member of the NAR.

However, clearly there is no requirement to place and promote the NAR alphabet soup after one's name. For that matter, you aren't even required to use the word "realtor" in your marketing material. Most of those NAR sponsored designations require annual dues to be paid. And for what? The real estate buying public doesn't know what they mean and likely wouldn't give a rat's ass if they did. The primary benefit I hear most people spouting is that you get listed in the designation's directories and can get referral business. That and you can stroke your own ego with a string of important looking stuff after your name.

Whoop-tee- freaking-do. Personally, I find that the internet makes a pretty good directory. And I've built up a pretty good referral directory of my own by getting to know agents all across the country. Having ABR, CBR, CRS, e-PRO, GRI after a name doesn't mean someone is a good agent. Pull up 10 random "e-pro" designees web sites. I'll betcha a commission check that at least half of them aren't worth a flip. Yet these are "e-pro's"

I'm not bashing continuing education, it's important. I've also certainly not been a poster boy for the NAR, but I'm not calling them evil and criminal. And if I did feel that way, I certainly wouldn't pump any more money into their coffers than I absolutely had to and I wouldn't flash their designations around in my marketing material.

It's not the decline in the quality of consumer questions that bothers me (well, it bothers me, as there are some real doozies there. Like today's "How many houses on this street will be for rent in 2010?" Oy....)

What REALLY bothers me is the general quality (or lack thereof) of the "real estate pro's" answers. Fair housing violations aside (and there are plenty) the answers with horrific grammar and spelling, the "In {pick any state} this is how it works" (when the questioner has an Arizona specific question) and the blatant and disgusting trolling for referrals makes me wanna puke sometimes.

Todd who?

I think the NAR made a great choice. (wow, I just said "NAR" and "great choice" in the same sentence! See, the social media manager thing is working already!)

I hope no one remotely connected to the State of Arizona government sees this. The LAST thing AZ needs (and I suspect CA as well) is an incentive for home builders to build new homes.

Do you know if existing spec homes going to be included in this?

@Matt - I join Mark in his bummedness that I wasn't able to speak/attend RETechSouth!

Why does there need to be a "Connect Killer"?? Isn't there more than enough space to have different conferences with different styles in different places?

C.

It the answer is "Both A and B" then by definition the real answer is "C".

Bottom line it there are WAY too many variables to consider before anyone can say that any single factor (such as number of foreclosures) results in any sort of market predictor. It's simply one, of dozens, of factors to consider.

PS: could you add the "subscribe to comments" plugin? I'd love to keep track of what people say on this.

Brad -

I am so so sorry to hear of Kevin's passing. He was one of the good guys, the REALLY good guys. Our thoughts and prayers go out to his family and all he touched in his too brief time here.

Congrats and Happy Blogiversary Todd! It should feel good, ya done a good thing. And I suspect you've only just begun.

"Sure Phoenix has an average in January of probably 20 degrees warmer or so. But they also have rattle snakes, cactus and the Cardinals"

Ahem. And which team is playing in the Superbowl this Sunday? (Though truth be told, I am a rabid BRONCOS fan! -- comes from living in Aurora for a couple of years as a kid, where I remember fairly frequent snow shoveling...).

Thanks for the linkage and kind words Bob!

"Gary V Do you twitter?"

Now that's a funny comment...

"I have been to the seminars where the speaker told us that we should limit the ability of the sellers to contact us."

I've heard that too, and it has to be one of the stupidest things I've heard in my life.

*Great* post Lane!

I love the flashes of the paparazzi...

Picking a "Best of Anything" on Sellsius can't be easy because it's chocked full of bestness.

Happy New Year Joe, thanks for all you do, and I'll see you next week in the Big Apple!

But if course. Didn't realize it was a "no repeat" list (an idea that I like).

I'm still looking for that "Girls of RE Blogging" calendar.... ;)

Great list Joe, of some fabulous bloggerati.

Almost makes me wish I was a girl.

Did I type that out loud?

As with any list, there will always be criticisms. My only thought would be to expand to 13 and add Kris Berg.

Congrats to all!!

I really need to catch up on my feed reader... Good on ya Nick, best of luck!

"(I believe this promotion is illegal since it could violate laws because it specifically targeted voters.)"

It may have been. At some point in the day Starbucks (and everyone else giving away free stuff) announced that anyone, voter or not, was eligible.

Congrats Joe. It's an honor to share a spot with you (and almost all the others).

I hear you're buying a round at Connect NYC... ;)

Twitter isn't for everyone. It's a tool in the toolbox for some, not right for others. Just like any other form of marketing/prospecting is right for some, and not for others.

I follow about 650 people on Twitter. Many are real estate professionals. But I have about 150 local to Phoenix, non-agent folks I follow and that follow me.

Last Wednesday, I went to an Ignite Phoenix event -- it wasn't real estate related, but there were a lot of folks there I've connected with on Twitter -- most who I'd never met face-to-face. We shook hands, we hugged, and we chatted like we'd known each other a long time.

I've never hounded these people for a sale, I've never put them in a contact database and "dripped them" or pushed anything on them. But they all know I'm a real estate broker, just as all my friends in "real life" know that.

I don't connect or interact with these people for the sole purpose of selling them a home. I connect because we share common interests.

From a business perspective, Twitter has expanded my "sphere of influence" by 150 people (not counting their friends and family). And it's growing on a daily basis.

Growing a SOI and making new friends and business contacts. Seems like a reasonably prudent thing to do.